New 100-400 to Launch with EOS 7D Mark II [CR2]

[Dylan777]

I might go with Sigma 120-300 f2.8 this time. I''m willing to loose the 100mm in reach, but gain more in light for indoor shots. I can always crop in PP since I'm only shoot raw.

Is that lens supposed to be pretty good? I really haven't used sigma lenses. I wonder how well it would take a tele converter?

Their latest 35mm and 70-200 f2.8 look REAL good. I hope their new 120-300 in the same level.

 

[bwfishing]

I'm no huge fan of the 100-400, but this sounds like Canon is getting back in the game and will be playing to win! This sounds like a great combo! If they put "real improvements" in these two they could have a serious problem keeping them in stock! This is very exciting news!

 

[mrsfotografie]

Am I the only one that loves the push/pull zoom?

I find it great for football (american, but both would probably apply; as well as any other large field games, rugby, polo, baseball, etc.), you can see nearly the whole field at 100mm to scan for interesting action, and almost instantly be at 400mm to get in to the action. If you're constantly going from one end of the range to the other, it's much faster with the push/pull.

The push/pull was much less useful, but in no way a hindrance, for things where I was staying at the same focal length for long periods of time; like when I shot a "Dirty Girl" mud run.

Would I want all zooms to be like that? Absolutely not! But I do think the 100-400 and it's common uses lend themselves to the more expedient, brute force method, that the push/pull provides.

Neuro and I also love the push-pull. Also, regarding the 70-300L, it's a great lens but too short for me too. An f/5.6 400mm is about the best compromise for a super telephoto that you can throw into your cabin luggage.

Count me in, it's great for motorsports! And the lens can double as a prime at any focal length when you tighten it down

 

[viggen61]

It would be bad marketing tactics if both zooms were launched in the same year!

On the other hand it could mean 100-400L/7D2 might not be out there till late 2014 or even 2015 to let sales of the 200-400 get some traction assuming its coming out soon.

I am saying this is because the current 100-400L is a fine zoom optic and a new version - presumably even better - would seriously cut into the sales of the 200-400 - yep one stop faster but twice the weight and three/four times the price!

But then maybe Canon expect some customers with deep pockets to buy both zooms!

The 200-400 f/4L 1.4x is going to be in a totally different price and performance class to a refreshed 100-400 ?.?-5.6. If the rumors are true, the 200-400 will be at least 4x the price of the 100-400. I really don't see a whole lot of cannibalization there.

The 200-400 is the pro sports/wildlife photographer's almost ideal lens. 400mm @ f/4 and 560mm @ f/5.6. The 100-400 is still the "budget" or "entry level" lens for wildlife and sports photography.

The only way I could see the cheaper lens cannibalizing any significant sales from the big lens would be if the 7DII had some spectacular performance in high ISO and AFs at f/8 so you could slap a 1.4xIII on it and be happy.

 

[viggen61]

Will the rumored 7D come with a new kit lens?

Highly doubt it, it's way to expensive and heavy to become a kit lens

Ha that was my thought, 100-400 kit lens. I want this to happen!!

No, not the 100-400 as a kit, but a new lens otherwise.

Would be nice, but which one? Maybe the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM?

 

[ewg963]

I love my push pull 100-400! It has been working well so far (finger crossed) but is interested at looking at the new 100-400.

 

[Lee Jay]

Hopefully, 100-400L II + 1.4x TC III + 7D II and its f/8 AF sensors are all designed to work together perfectly from the start. I've only been asking for this since about 2006 or so. Now they'll finally make it, and it'll be unaffordable!

 

[ddashti]

So will the 200-400 and 100-400 be released/announced around the same time, then?
Seems like Canon is holding back many products, yet the public knows about very few of them.
The price on the Nikon will definitely trigger Canon to give it an even higher price...

 

[dolina]

What I wanna see is a 400/5.6 with 4 or more stops of IS. 100-400 zoom is nice and all but it's a zoom. I want a prime.

 

[kirispupis]

This post came about five days too early.

I waited almost a year at one point for a new 100-400 to release, but ended up buying the existing 100-400. I used it for a few years and then sold it about two years ago and now use the 400/5.6 - which I like much better.

I might buy a new 100-400, but only if reviews prove that it has amazing IQ (better than 400/5.6) and extremely fast AF. Personally though I would prefer a new 400/5.6 that has IS and a closer focusing distance.

 

[AprilForever]

The 7D MK II I want. The 100-400sounds interesting, but not too interesting to me... However, I am sure than many will pick it up... The two lenses I see the most in the everglades are the 100-400 and some sigma X-500 zoom.

I'm saving my money for bigger glass... at some point... 600 f4 is more up my aisle. At any rate though, the 100-400 would make a good B-camera lens, for close overhead flights...

 

[G650ER]

I'm excited for these 2 releases!
Updating my body would be useful and having the same IQ and AF on a new 100-400 with 4 stop IS would allow me to sell my 400L which lacks IS for low light shooting..

 

[skinkfoot]

Okay, I am interested in this lens but... I use and love the 400 5.6 L, and what I would really like is a 500 5.6, with or without "IS" say $2500 without and $3200 with "IS"

 

[ahab1372]

How about a new 400 5.6L IS ?
smaller, lighter, sharper !

That would be very welcome, but a hard decision. One of the great things about the 100-400L is that you get a 400mm lens that collapses down to the size of a 70-200/2.8. The 400/5.6 is more of a challenge to pack/transport.

Are there any foldable/collapsible primes out there? They could have the benefits of both worlds: IQ of a prime, easier to transport like a zoom.

 

[Loswr]

Okay, I am interested in this lens but... I use and love the 400 5.6 L, and what I would really like is a 500 5.6, with or without "IS" say $2500 without and $3200 with "IS"

Just guessing, but I think 500/5.6 puts it into the ~$4K range based on element size. I doubt we'll see one - over 400mm, Canon wants more of your money than that...

 

[skinkfoot]

Okay, I am interested in this lens but... I use and love the 400 5.6 L, and what I would really like is a 500 5.6, with or without "IS" say $2500 without and $3200 with "IS"

Just guessing, but I think 500/5.6 puts it into the ~$4K range based on element size. I doubt we'll see one - over 400mm, Canon wants more of your money than that...

Don't tell Canon, but, I would probably buy it at $3500-$4000. I really think there is a missing $3-$5000 hole in their lineup.

 

[FunPhotons]

I'm glad I didn't buy a used 600mm. I'd like a longer reach, but a brand new 100-400 with the latest IS would fit the ticket, for much less money.

 

[ronderick]

Wow.... finally something solid this time (or so I hope).

I still remember the speculation going around this forum about which was to be renewed first - the 100-400mm or the 70-200 f/2.8L IS. That was before the announcement of the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II.

Thank god I waited - that took a lot of will power. ;D

(But then again, I won't be holding my breath until I actually see some announcements).

 

[Loswr]

(But then again, I won't be holding my breath until I actually see some announcements).

Lol. I'd recommend waiting until the lens hits the shelves. If you'd started holding your breath when the 200-400mm f/4L IS 1.4x was announced, you'd be a mouldering corpse by now.

 

[9VIII]

I have a hard time thinking if I'm going to put $5K+ toward anything that it wouldn't either be a 300f2.8 or 500f4. If you're just trying to shave money off the 500mm it seems kind of futile given that everything cost within a few grand of each other, if you can't afford the longer one you probably can't afford any of them.

What I would really like is a 100-300f4. If I'm going with long glass the 400f5.6 prime is hard to beat (especially for the price), if I'm going to use anything shorter than that, it needs to be faster too.
I have to wonder why they can't make medium/long zoom lenses go from f2-2.8 or f2.8-4. Something like that would be the epitome of multi-role lenses.